b' %, 







.wm^ 




■1°*. 




^* ^m^>^.• ,^^'% '--iK- /\ '"^'' ^^'% ^ 



«o 



^•- -ot*' «« 



.■^' 






!v°-n^ 










•* ^^ 






K' i°-nf^ '. 












i°-n^. 












A°^ 








•^ "-..^'^ .' 




t O ^i <^ • 



^o^ I 









^^O^ .^ 












^9" 



■%''?^V'' V^^^\-'^ %''^<./ V-T^ 

fe-\ /^']^i^^y^ y«-^;:'\. .^°^:^^%''- 






•* .*^ 



^°Xv .^ 






-. -^^o* 



r-^^. 



v^^..i::c',*c^. ^0' 






\' ^jP-n*.. V 



A9^ ,. 



0' \.*^'^\/ %''^-/ "V--^^*/ 













* »'«sife^'. -^^^ ^ »:AV/k» •^.. ..^ »^ 













I SPEECH 



HON. F. P. STANTON, OF TENNESSEE, 

IN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MARCH 14, 1848. 



On the Message of the President "transmitting Doc- 
uments in relation to the return of Santa Anna 
and Paredes to Mexico, and refusing to furnish 
the Instructions given Mr. Slidell, as requested 
by a Resolution of the House of the 4th of Janu- 
ary, 1848. 

Mr. STANTON said : Mr. Speaker, if it were 
my purpose to reply to the argument of the gentle- 
man from Mississippi, who has just taken his seat, 
the character and extent of the subjects introduced 
by him would give me an unlimited field for the 
■discussion of every question connected with the 
Mexican war. But I do not rise now to answer 
particularly the speech of that gentleman. Nor 
do I propose to direct my remarks exclusively to 
the message of the President, now under consid- 
eration, in which he states the most satisfactory 
reasons for refusing information called for by a 
resolution of this House. My purpose is to give 
my views generally upon the present condition of 
affairs as connected with the existing war, and to 
show the responsibility which justly attaches to 
the conduct and bearing of the two political parties 
which control the destinies of this country. In 
doing this, however, it will come properly within 
the scope of my remarks incidentally to defend the 
position assumed by the President, from the severe 
assaults which have been made upon it by the 
gentleman from Mississippi, [Mr. Tompkins,] and 
others, who have taken part in this debate. 

The treaty which is now known to have been 
submitted to the Senate of the United States, and 
ratified, with some modifications, by tjjat body, 
is yet to be submitted to the Mexican Congress for 
its ratification. We are by no means sure that its 
action will be favorable. We cannot, therefore, 
properly consider things in the same light in which 
we should view them, if the existence of peace 
were absolutely certain. Consequently, every ques- 
tion which would have been legitimately the sub- 
ject of consideration before the arrival of the 
treaty, may still, with great propriety, enter into 
our present discussions. 

The gentleman from Mississippi, [Mr. Tomp- 
kins,] in reviewing the message now on your table, 
has taken occasion to brand the President with the 
charge of a gross usurpation of power in the com- 
mencement of the existing war. There is nothing 
novel in this grave imputation. It is only another 
edition of what we have heard a thousand times 
asserted on this floor, and as often endeavored to 
be sustained by^every variety of argument which 
the minds of ingenious gentlemen could invent. 
To prove this charge against the President, amount- 
ing to little less than actual treason, seems, from 
their arguments, to be the leading motive of gen- 

Printed at the Congresaional Globe Office. 



tlemen in endeavoring to force from the President 
a premature disclosure of the secret correspondence 
of the State Department with our minister in Mex- 
ico. Of the constitutionality of the President's 
course in refusing the information, there can be no 
question. There is no clause in the Constitution 
requiring him to respond to the calls of either 
House of Congress. It is his duty to consult the 
Senate in matters of foreign negotiation, and it is 
obviously proper for him to give to his Senatoria 
advisers every item of information which wil 
enable them to act understandingly. There are 
cases, however, in which he may, and the Presi- 
dent often does, withhold many facts from them. 
When the House of Representatives, which does 
not occupy the same confidential and advisory 
relation to the President, calls upon him for infor- 
mation, it is his solemn duty to consider whether 
the communication can be safely made with due 
regard to the true interests of the country. In de- 
termining this question, he acts jupon his own 
responsibility and at his own periL But it is in all 
cases a question of expediency Alone. /There is no 
constitutional or legal obligation depriving him of 
all discretion in a matter oftentimes so grave and. 
important in its bearing upon the public weal. 1 
shall endeavor to show, Mr. Speaker, that, under 
present circumstances — our country engaged in a 
foreign war, and parties at home bitterly divided 
upon all the questions connected with it — there are 
the strongest possible grounds of expediency, pal- 
pable to us who do not know the nature of the 
correspondence sought to be made public, render- 
ing it a matter of imperious necessity that our 
secret negotiations should not be exposed to the 
eye of the world. 

The very arguments adduced by the honorable 
gentlemen who attack the principles of this mes- 
sage, would of themselves convince me of the per- 
fect propriety of the President's course, even if he 
were not fortified by the authority of Washington,, 
and others who have worthily occupied the seat 
which was sanctified by *' the Father of his Coun- 
try. " It is asserted that the President is the author 
of this war, and that the information called for is 
necessary to enable the gentlemen who make the 
accusation, successfully to brand him as its author, 
and to throw all its responsibility on his shoulders- 
This, sir, is the patriotic spirit m which this novel 
doctrine is urged at the present crisis ! I wish to 
inquire whether this spirit ought to be gratified. 
And, in order to do this properly, I will advert 
briefly to the history of this war, especially in its 
relation to the conduct of those who now com- 
plain of the President for refusing the infarmation 
sought. 



Whatever may have been the circumstances 
attending the commencement of the war, whatever 
may have been its true cause, and whoever may 
be responsible for its origin, there is one fact which 
cannot be disputed — there is one great proposition 
which admits of nodiscussion. Itisthis: that from 
the 13th May, 1846, the war became our country's 
war, solemnly sanctioned by every department of 
the Government, and by every legal and constitu- 
tional form known to the fundamental laws of the 
land. This law of the 13th May, 1846, declared 
that the war was commenced " by the act of Mexi- 
co.'" I believe that solemn declaration to have been 
strictly true. But, true or not true, the acts of the 
President up to that time, whatever they may have 
been, were not only justified, but sanctioned, adopt- 
ed, and made the actsof the American Government. 
By every high requisite of legislation, and by the 
constitutional action and concurrence of every de- 
partment of the Government, the existing war was 
acknowledged, approved, and assumed, and all the 
power of the United States was authorized to be 
exerted in its prosecution. Tell me not, gentlemen 
on the other side of this Chamber, tell me not of 
your objections to the preamble of that act; tell me 
not that you and your party associates of the other 
House voted for it only to relieve Gen. Taylor from 
his dangerous position. Let this be so, and still it 
does not affect my position in the least. Say, if 
you will, it was all done by the Democrats — that 
you objected to the preamble, and they forced you 
-to take the bill as it was. Still, it was none the less 
the country's war. The Government, by a con- 
stitutional majority of the representatives of the 
people and of the States, was none the less fully 
and absolutely committed. It is in respect to a 
war thus comr^enced, and thus assumed by every 
department of this Government, proceeding by 
every solemn legal and constitutional mode, that 
such declarations as we have listened to from the 
gentleman from Mississippi and others were sent 
forth to the enemy and to the world. 

But you, who voted for the first act recognizing 
the war, may justify yourselves as you can. So 
large a force — ten millions of money and fifty thou- 
sand men — was scarcely necessary to relieve Gen- 
eral Taylor; and the terms of tlie bill itself indicate 
but too clearly that such was but an unimportant 
part of its purpose. But your conduct at the sub- 
sequent session of Congress leaves you no escape. 
No flimsy excuse of a similar kind will save you 
from your full share of responsibility for the war 
measures of that session. What was then the 
condition of things ? Our victorious army was 
then in the heart of t'^e enemy's country, waging 
.a war of invasion with great success. The Presi- 
(dent's message gave us a very clear and satisfac- 
rtory statement of the results, which, up to that 
.time, had been accomplished, and of the objects to 
,be accomplished by tiie further prosecution of the 
.war. With all these statements before your eyes, 
yc-u assisted in supplying men and money. You 
charged the President v/ith views of conquest; 
yoLi denounced his policy in strong terms; yet you 
voted the supplies. I will read from the Presi- 
dent's message to show how fully we were in- 
formed of all that had been done, and all that was 
proposed to be accomplished. The Executive 
said: 

<' I ecngratulate you on the success which has thus attend- 
ed our uulitary and naval operations. In les3 than seven 



months after Mexico commenced hostilities,* at a time de- 
lected by herself, we have taken possession of many of her 
principal ports, driven back and pursued her invadingarmy^ 
and acquired military possession of tlie Mexican provinces 
of New Mexico, Nevv Leon, Coaliuila,Tamaulipas, and the 
Californias, a territory larger in extent than that emhraeed 
in the original thirteen States of the Union, iniiabited by a 
consideralde population, and much of it more than a thou- 
sand miles from tlie points at which we had to collect our 
forces and commence our movements. By the blockad*, 
the import and export trade of the enemy lias been cut off" 

So much as to the result of our operations, and 
the extent of our conquests up to that time. 1 will 
now read some short extracts explanatory of the 
objects for which he demanded the means of still 
further prosecuting the war. He said: 

"The war has not been waged with a view to conquest; 
but, having been commenced by Mexico, it has been carried 
into the enemy's country, and will be vigorously prosecuted 
there, with a view to obtain an honorable peace, and tliere- 
by secure ample indemnity for the expenses of the war, as 
well as to our much-injured citizens, who hold large pecu- 
niary demands against Mexico." * * * * 

" it may be proper to provide for the security of these im- 
portant conquests, by making an adequate appropriation for 
the purpose of erecting fortifications, and defraying the ex- 
penses necessarily incident to the maintenance of our pos- 
session and authority over them." * * * * 

"Among our just causes of complaint against Mexico, 
arising out of her refusal to treat for peace, as well before as 
since the war so unjustly commenced on her part, are, the 
extraordinary expenditures in which we have been involved. 
Justice to our own people will make it proper that Mexico 
should be held responsible for these expenditures." 

I repeat, sir, that with these facts before their 
eyes — with a full knowledge of the extent of the 
conquests already made, and the purposes design- 
ed by the Administration, the members of the Op- 
position on this f^oor very generally voted for the 
bills introduced in accordance with the Presiden- 
tial recommendation. But, sir, these expositions 
by the President, clear and unequivocal as they 
v/ere, did not constitute the whole of the informa- 
tion then before that Congress. General Scott had 
gone to take command of the army in Mexico, and 
it was Vv'ell known that an important opetation was 
about to be undertaken — nothing less than the re- 
duction of Vera Cruz and its almost impregnable 
castle, and thus to open a way to the very capital of 
Mexico itself. Gentlemen did not hesitate to refer 
to these palpable demonstrations, and to denounce 
the policy of the Administration as tending to con- 
quests the rnost extensive as well as the most un- 
just. And yet, strange to say, most of those very 
gentlemen voted for the men and money demanded 
by the President to carry out the very policy 
plainly exhibited in the message, and to accom- 
plish the magnificent military projects, the prepara- 
tions for which were apparent to the whole world. I 
have before me the vote on one of the leading acts 
of the last session, known as " the ten-regiment 
bill." The vote is 35 to 170— less than one-fifth 
of the whole House voting against it; and many 
of them, doubtless, because they preferred some 
other mode of raising the force proposed. Among 
the majority, I find the name of every Whig from 
the State of Tennessee. I may, therefore, say, 
without any inaccuracy, that the great mass of that 
party in this House endorsed the policy of the 
President, and assisted him, by their votes at least, 
in carrying it out. It might be inferred from this, 
sir, that they had spoken and otherwise acted 
consistently with their votes at that session. But 
unfortunately this was not the case. Look over 
the debates of that session of Congress, and what a 
picture is presented to the eye of the patriot ! 



3 



I have nothing to do with the motives of honor- 
able gentlemen who took f)art in those proceed- 
ings. I deal with fixcts alone — facts which I am 
certain will not be dispiited, because they are re- 
corded in the debates of Congress and in the jour- 
nals of the covnitry,and have become a part of the 
authentic history of the period. It is true that 
•many gentlemen on the other side of tliis Hall were 
voting men and money; but at the same time they 
were denouncing the war as wrong and unjust on 
our part; these denunciations reached the enemy, 
inspired him with hope, and gave energy and ob- 
stinacy to his resistance. There was not a word 
Tittered in this House, and reverijerating among 
these marble columns and through these lofiy 
arches, that was not instant!}' wafted to the hills 
and valleys of Mexico, and made to resound 
through the length and breadth of that hostile land, 
encouraging the hearts of the people, and nerving 
their arms for the struggle. I do not intend to 
charge these gentlemen with treason, actual or 
constructive. They have the right here to say 
what they please — to give free and unqualified 
utterance to their opinions and feelings, whatever 
they may be. This is the freedom of speech which, 
like the freedom of the press, is one of the most 
valuable and cherished privileges of the American 
people. But, sir, while the use of this privilege is 
unrestricted, and propei-ly so, it is always exer- 
cised under the gravest responsibility for its abuse. 
When I speak of responsibility, I mean responsi-. 
bility to the people — to that public sentiment of 
this country which weighs tlie actions and the 
words of public men, and holds their authors to a 
solemn account for the consequences of what they 
say and do. The words used by the President — 
*' giving aid and comfort to the enemy" — have 
been the occasion for loud reproaches and denun- 
ciations against that officer. I do not intend to 
adopt these words, since they seem to be so un- 
palatable to the taste of those gentlemen who take 
them to themselves. But, if the House will per- 
mit me, I will endeavor to look coolly and calmly 
back upon the doings and sayings of gentlemen in 
this House particularly, and show the character of 
their acts, and the consequences necessarily and 
Jegiiimately resulting from them. I desire to deal 
fairly with the subject, and I challenge the scrutiny 
of gentlemen to facts v;hich 1 state, and the infer- 
ences I <lraw from them. 

I beijin, Mr. Speaker, by asserting the fact, as 
xtraordinary and astounding as it is undeniable, 
that, from the remote origin of this war down to 
the present moment, gentlemen on the other side 
of this House, with few exceptions, have either 
passed in silence or boldly approved what Mexico 
has done, and have uniformly denounced in the 
strongest terms the policy of their own Govern- 
ment. Speech after speech, in oneincessantstream, 
has been poured into the public ear, bitterly con- 
demning a war which I have shown to have been 
sanctioned and assumed, in every legal form, by 
every department of the Government. Gentlemen 
have ranged the whole field of argument — they 
have sifted all the acts of the Executive — they have 
criticised all its diplomatic and military correspond- 
ence — and they seem to have had eyes only for the 
fancied errors of their own Government, and none 
for the real crimes of the enemy. 

When the cloud of war first became visible — 
when it was no larger than a man's hand — the dec- 



larations were rife and loudly uttered, that Mexico 
had been aggrieved in the annexation of Texas; 
that she had just ground of complaint; in short, 
that we had committed a hostile act, and necessa- 
rily taken the Mexican war upon our own shoul- 
ders. Such were the greetings of those gentlemen 
1 to the Mexican Government. Did they tend to 
pacify the enemy? Did they tend to bring about 
an honorable adjustment of all difficulties between 
the contending parties? Far from it. Mexico 
took the word from the lips of our statesmen. She 
witlidrew her minister from Washington; and that 
functionary, as he departed, flung in our face an 
insulting threat of war. Have we ever heard any 
gentleman of the opposite party speak in terms of 
indignation, or even of weak disapproval, in refer- 
ence to this important part of the great drama? 
No, sir ! This transaction seems to be overlooked 
and forgotten; and all the denunciations of the 
gentlemen are reserved for their own country. 

The Executive sought to reopen negotiations 
with Mexico, and that Government, through Mr. 
Black, pledged itself to receive our minister. One 
was accordingly sent, with full power to adjust all 
questions. How was he received? The corre- 
spondence is before the world, and it exhibits the 
most contemptible quibbling on the part of Mexico 
that ever disgraced a civilized government. And 
how have these transactions been treated here by 
gentlemen in the Opposition? Have they fourxd 
anything to blame in the conduct of Mexico? 
Nothino; whatever. On the contrary, they have 
adopted that miserable quibble by which Mexico 
insisted that we should have sent a commissioner 
instead of a minister plenipotentiary. They have 
questioned the integrity and sincerity of their own 
Executive, when manifestly striving, to obtain 
peace; while they have excused, palliated, and 
defended the conduct of Mexico, while she was 
boldly rejecting the only means of amicable ad- 
justment. In quoting the correspondence on this 
subject, these gentlemen have microscopic eyes for 
every sentence of a conciliatory character written 
by t e Mexican authorities, while they are utterly 
blind to their insulting denunciations and bold 
threats of war. The former are quoted and re- 
quoted, and sent to the people in all shapes and 
forms through their thousand printed speeches, 
while the latter are absolutely overlooked, omit- 
ted, and thus entirely suppressed. 

The Mexican Government insists, that instead 
of a minister plenipotentiary, we ought to have 
sent a commissioner, with power to treat of the 
Texas question alone. What do the Opposition 
here say to this? Do they make the obvious re- 
ply, that the minister has power to treat of this 
as well as all other questions, and that he was 
ready to listen to propositions of any sort they 
might choose to present? Not a word of the kind ! 
They side with the Mexican diplomatists. They 
adopt the Mexican view of the subject. They 
seem to admit, by their course of argument, that 
the American Government ought to have yieltled 
to this demand, and excluded the great question 
of indemnity for Mexican spoliations from the 
negotiations about to be entered upon. They go 
further than this. They say, in effect, that our 
minister ought not to have had the power to treat 
of indemnity — that Mexican perversity and obsti- 
nacy should have been so far humored, that we 
ought, in advance, to have stipulated and pro- 



claimed that our minister was not to be allowed to 
set up any claim for our long-suifering-, plundered 
citizens. The world knows that "these shifts 
of the Mexican Government were but hollow pre- 
texts and shallow subterfuges. Yet gentlemen here 
gravely sustain them. The fault, in their judg- 
ment, is all on our side. I have not heard one of 
them allude to these facts as any palliation, as any 
plausible excuse or reasonable provocation, for the 
conduct of our own Government. Mexico, in the 
eyes of these gentlemen, seems to be right in every- 
thing, while we are always wrong. The Mexi- 
cans object to the character of one of the attaches 
of the legation. The gentleman from Mississippi 
[Mr. ToMPKiNsJ insists that we should submit to 
her dictation in this particular. The Government 
of Herrera, no doubt honestly disposed to peace, 
was trembling in the first breath of the popular 
hurricane which soon precipitated the war, and it 
was palpable to all eyes that no administration 
there could safely engage in negotiations for peace. 
Yet the Opposition here will neither see nor admit 
the force of this fact. Determined to throw the 
whole burden of wrong upon their own country, 
they openly or tacitly endorse all the equivocations 
and pretences, all the absurd claims and extrava- 
gant demands, of a wicked and infatuated enemy. 
These are the gentlemen, sir, who now denounce 
the President for not exposing to their view and 
that of the world the secret and confidential cor- 
respondence of the Government with its own min- 
ister, and that, too, while the war is still unended 
and negotiations incomplete ! Is it to be wondered , 
sir, that under these circumstances, when the in- 
formation sought might be used for the benefit of 
the common enemy, the President, in the exer- 
cise of a wise and patriotic discretion, refused to 
make the exposure, even upon the call of this 
House.' 

But, sir, I turn to another portion of the history 
of this war. I look to the fatal and decisive oc- 
currences on the Rio Bravo. And how have these 
been treated by the Opposition here? We might 
justly expect to behold a different picture; but un- 
fortunately the colors are unchanged, even by the 
blood of American citizens who fell at Palo Alto 
and Resaca. Mexico had repeatedly threatened 
war, in the proclamations of her Executives, 
through the mouths of her ministers, in the orders 
of her generals, in all forms and shapes which the 
warning could assume, avowing her intention to 
reconquer Texas. That was the declared object 
of all her movements. But gentlemen on the other 
side seemed to have no ears for these loud and re- 
peated declarations. No; the trump of war was 
ringing through the mountains and valleys of Mex- 
ico. But you were deaf to these notes of prepara- 
tion. Mexican generals were calling their forces 
to thefieli; they were marshalling their armies ; 
and finally they begun to march them down upon 
the devoted people of Texas. You were blind to 
these movements; you were silent amidst them all. 
I remember well when an honorable gentleman 
from Pennsylvania, [Mr. C. J. Ingersoll,] during 
the first session of the last Congress, told us that 
while these things were transpiring before the eyes 
of the world, he had written a private letter to the 
President, pointing out these warlike preparations, 
and advising him, instead of waiting for the inva- 
sion, to cross the Rio Bravo, attack the Mexicans 
on their march, and scatter them before they were 



ready to strike a blow against Texas.* There was^ 
good sense in this advice. But you had no eyes 
for the military movements of Mexico. You could 
see nothing but the movement of our own army 
from Corpus Christi to the Rio Bravo. Not a word> 
to my knowledge, ever escaped your lips against 



* I mean now to take higher ground; and with great def- 
erence submit a constitutional position, which requires no 
more for its establishment than that the territory between 
the Nueces and the Bravo was at least disputed ground ; that 
we claimed it ; and that the President, in ordering General 
Taylor to the neighborhood of Matamoros, knew that, if not 
our indisputable territory, at any rate, our negotiations for 
many years— ever since the purciiase of Louisiana — and our 
recent legislation, considered it as ours. Tliat fact cannot 
be denied. Granting, for argument's sake, that Mexico claim- 
ed it too, and considered it hers, I contend that it was the 
President's constitutional right and duty to prevent Mexico 
from expelling Texas from the territory in dispute. Having 
examined the subject when General Taylor was first ordered 
there, I took the liberty of advising Mr. Polk that his right 
and policy were, not to await Mexican forces on this side of 
the Bravo, but to order our commander to cross that river, 
meet, and crush the invaders on their own soil. When they 
passed the Rubicon, we should have crossed the Bravo. The 
second clause of the tenth section of the first article of the 
Constitution of the United Slates provides, that no State 
"shall engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such 
imminent danger as will not admit of dclay.'^ That was 
precisely the predicament of the State of Texas. And her 
ciinstituted authorities, instead of engaging in war single- 
handed, called ou the President for protection. General 
Arista, with some two thousand troops, was at Matamoros. 
General Ampudia, with some two thousand more, was on his 
way thither, avowedly to join Arista, and together connnit 
hostilities. War was declared at the Mexican ca()ital. I think 
it cannot be denied that the State of Texas, by the Consti- 
tution of the United States, was authorized to " engage in 
war" with Mexico — a war of self-defence. If so, was not 
the President, called on by that State for protection against 
Mexican invasion, authorized, as Texas certainly was, to 
repel the invader? The two acts of Congress on this sub- 
ject, of May 2, 1792, and made perpetual by that of February 
2S, 1795, are explicit, "that whenever the United States shall 
'be in imminent danger of invasion from any foreign nation, 
'it shall be lawful for the President of the United States to 
' call forth such number of the militia as he mav judge neces- 
'saryto repel such invasion." The distinction is broadly 
drawn by the Constitution, and these laws which carry it 
out, between actual and imminent danger of invasion. The 
Executive is as much authorized to act in the case of danger 
as in that of actuality; and the state power to " engage in 
war" is, in like manner, marked by this distinction. The 
President's is an extreme power, no doubt, to be most care- 
fully exercised. President Polk is a prudent man, and was 
alive to the dread responsibility of his situation. It was 
much easier for me to advise than for him to do what I ad- 
vised over the Bravo. But I submit, far in advance of the 
question of boundary with which it has been attempted ta 
bind him, that, in the exercise of a sound and fair discretion, 
looking to all the circumstances, he would have been jus- 
tified in ordering General Taylor to cross the boundary,^ 
whether acknowledged or disputed, anticipate the threat- 
ened attack, carry the war into the enemy's country, and, 
by prevention, put a stop to it. He thought otherwise, and 
I do not presume to censure him. Still I believe, that if 
Geneial Taylor, with his some three thousand troops, had 
been ordered to attack General Arista, with some two thou- 
sand, at Mitamiros, and had demolished him before General 
Ampudia joined with two thousand more, who, in the event 
of Arista's overthrow, might then have been crashed too, by 
this anticipation of the imminent danger, it would all have 
vanished, and there would probably have been no more 
tr (ubie vvitli Mexico. Will it be contended, as I ventured 
to illustrate my argument to the President, that if Mexico had 
a naval squadron equal to ours there, and it was seen sail- 
ing down to attack ours, colors flying, guns loaded, and alt 
cleared fur action, that ours must lie at anchor till assailed, 
and not, till some hundreds of our people had been slaugh- 
tered, return the blow.' It cannot be that such an absurdity 
is law. The military principle, that a connnander, having 
reason to apprehend that he is about to be attJickcd, is safest 
by anticipating the assault and becoming the assailant, is 
true, even in the controversy of debate. It is universal wis- 
dom, and as such, ingrafted on our Constitution and laws. — 
[Extract from the speech of Mr. C. J. Jni;en<o/Z, in. the Housi 
of Representatives^ delivered idth January, 1847. 



5 



this open preparation of hostile armies, made with 
the avowed purpose of entering our country and 
taking possession of it up to the Sabine. All the 
thunders of your denunciation are reserved for the 
defensive military movements of your own Govern- 
ment. Incessant and unmeasured have been your 
curses upon the head of the Executive, for the peace- 
ful march of our army to the vicinity of Matamoros. 

And how has it been, sir, in reference to the 
disputed territory, as it has been called, between 
the Nueces and the Bravo? Scarcely a voice has 
been heard on that side of the House to maintain 
our right to the territory in question. But Mexi- 
can claims have always found among those gentle- 
men ready and eloquent defenders. The most 
flagrant and unjust conduct of that Government 
has been excused with all the zeal and ingenuity 
of an advocate pleading for his client. Yet Mex- 
ico herself has never, to my knowledge, placed the 
existing controversy between us upon the ground 
of our invasion of that disputed territory. From 
the beginning she has insisted upon her title to the 
whole of Texas, and she has never ceased to urge 
her claim to that extent. An honorable gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Ashmun] suggested the 
other day, while a gentleman from Connecticut 
[Mr. Truman Smith] was addressing the House, 
that the fifteen or twenty millions stipulated in the 
recent treaty to be paid to Mexico was partly in 
consideration of her surrender of Texas. It is 
true, sir, that she has never abandoned that absurd 
claim. Gentlemen here have placed in her mouth 
the argument drawn from the disputed territory; 
they have given her a position of apparent strength 
which she did not herself pretend to assume. 
They have made for her a stronger and belter de- 
fence than she ever attempted to make for herself, 
at least until after she had received the suggestion 
from them. 

Every kind of sophistry has been put in requi- 
sition to enforce the condemnation of our own 
country. Witness the argument of an honorable 
gentleman from Florida, who addressed the House 
the other day. He referred to the Oregon question, 
and contrasted the course of the President in that 
affair with his conduct in this Mexican difficulty. 
The President, said he, could invade the disputed 
territory when Mexico was concerned, but dared 
not do so when England was our antagonist. By 
this argument, it is clearly implied that the two 
cases are parallel. But how are they in truth? 
England was peaceable; Mexico was threatening 
war. England had not broken off diplomatic rela- 
tions; Mexico had. The British minister was in 
this city maintaining friendly and courteous inter- 
course with our Government; and our minister was 
quietly residin2: in London, and peaceably negotia- 
tinij with the British Cabinet. Mexico had insult- 
ingly rejected our diplomatic agents, refused even 
to listen to any terms of peace, and commenced 
open preparations for war. And yet gentlemen 
argue as if the cases were parallel, and as if the 
conduct of the President ought to have been the 
same in both. Sir, there mii^ht be some palliation 
for tlie use of false arguments to susti\in the honor 
of the country; but when such sophistry as this 
is used, for the purpose of placing our own Gov- 
ernment in the wrong, and thus staining its honor, 
I know not upon what principle gentlemen can 
hope to excuse themselves before the peaple who^e 
servants they are. 



I appeal to gentlemen on all sides — to all who 
have witnessed the debates from the beginning, 
whether such has not been the character of the 
arguments uniformly presented on that side of the 
House. Every coloring has been given to the facts 
which could present the United States before the 
world as acting a part the most wantonly unjust 
and oppressive; while, to say the least, the most 
forbearing silence has been maintained towards the 
misconduct of Mexico. 

Again, sir, it is argued that our Government 
committed a great outrage in marching the army 
into the disputed territory. But General Taylor 
found the enemy's forces there, who had evidently 
been sent in anticipation of the conflict, and as the 
advance guard of the Mexican army. Yet gentle- 
men have never denounced Mexico for invading 
the disputed territory. They freely acknowledge 
for her the existence of rights in the disputed terri- 
tory, which they will not allow to their own coun- 
try. No voice was heard to condemn this hostile 
movement on the part of the enemy; but every spe- 
cies of violent repi'ehension is exhausted to blacken 
the character of a counteracting measure, on the 
part of the commander-in-chief of our army. 

And what has been the course of argument pur- 
sued by these gentlemen in reference to the bound- 
ary line ? To them, sir, it imports nothing that 
Santa Anna acknowledged the Rio Bravo to be the 
boundary by the treaty of San Jacinto, in which 
important advantages were yielded to Mexico and 
accepted by her, while she refused to perform her 
part of the bargain. It is nothing to them that 
Mexican genera's, in their negotiaUons upon the 
bloody field, have stipulated to withdraw their 
forces beyond the Bravo as the boundary of Texas. 
It is nothing that Mexican leaders, in their procla- 
mations, have solemnly declared that all the inhab- 
itants of Texas, within one league of the Bravo, 
were to be treated as enemies. It is nothing that 
Texas has uniformly maintained her jurisdiction 
on the Lower Bravo, organizing counties, estab- 
lishing land offices, collection districts, and post- 
roads, and traversing the territory with a well-ap- 
pointed regiment of unresisted soldiers. All these 
important acts are nothing; nor is it of any avail, 
in their eyes, that Texas, by her act of 1836, 
declared the Bravo to be her boundary, and was 
admitted as a sovereign State of this Union with 
that declaration fully known to us, and anxious to 
be maintained by her. I quote a passage from the 
late speech of Mr, Calhouv, as high authority 
upon this question of boundary, sustaining the fact 
that Texas has maintained her jurisdiction over 
this territory. He says: 

'• From the Passo del Norte to the mouth of the river, a 
distance of a few hundred miles, a single fact will show 
what little force will be necessary to its defence. It was a 
frontier between Texas and Mexico, when the former had 
but an incon-iderable population — not more than a hundred 
and fifiy thousand at the utmost, at any time— with no 
stnndi nil army, and but very few irregular troops; yet, for 
several years" she maintained this line without any, except 
slisht occasional intrusion from Mexico, and that, too, when 
Mexico was far more consolidated in her power, and when 
revoluiions were not so frequent, and her money resources 
were far greater than at present. If, then, Texas alone, 
under such circumstances, could defend that frontier for so 
long a p Miod, can any man believe that now, when she is 
barked by the whole of the United States, now that Mexico 
is exhausted, defeated, and prostrated— I repeat can any 
man believe that it would involve as great a sacrifice to us 
of men and money to defend that frontier as did the last 
campaign ? 

Mr. Calhoun is no supporter of the Administration 



6 



in this war, yet he cannot dispute the Texan claim 
to this territory. But why need 1 quote anything 
to convince gentlemen who seem determined to see 
nothing which is calculated to relieve the Admin- 
istration from blame? They say the resolutions 
of annexation left the boundary question open, 
therefore the President had no right to assume the 
Bravo as the line. In vain we insist that the Ex- 
ecutive was bound to know no other line until a 
new one was established by the treaty-making 
power of this Government, in conjunction witli 
that of Mexico. Congress had no power to declare 
what was the line of Texas. No other power on 
earth could do so but the sovereign State of Texas 
herself, unless Mexico and the United States should 
establish it by treaty. But Mexico refused to treat. 
She disdained to enter into negotiations about a 
paltry strip of land, when she claimed an empire. 
What could the President do ? Must he adopt the 
line claimed by Mexico? Then he would have 
retreated to the Sabine. He had no alternative, 
when Mexico refused to negotiate, but to assume 
the line v/hich the sovereign State of Texas claimed 
when she entered this Confederacy. But all this 
is of no consequence to the honorable gentlemen 
on the otlier side. They can see no shadow of 
right in Texas to the territory claimed by her, and 
nothing in the circumstances of the whole case to 
palliate the conduct of their own Government. It 
IS utterly incomprehensible to me, that gentlemen, 
with all the facts before them, can find nothing in 
all the conduct of Mexico to reprehend. Why is 
it so ? Is it that party spirit has obtained complete 
mastery in the minds of the Opposition? Has it 
come to this, that gentlemen care not how much 
they blacken the reputation of their own Govern- 
ment in the eyes of the world, provided they can 
break down the Administration which conducts 
it? 

We might well suppose, sir, that this was the 
end of the chapter. But not so. I well remember 
when, in the last Congress, a distinguished gen- 
tleman from Virginia, not now, I am sorry to say, 
rejoicing in the distinctive appellation of " the lone 
star" which he then bore, made a labored effort 
hereto prove thatMexico had been guilty of no spo- 
liations on the property of our citizens, or, at most, 
to a very inconsiderable extent — an extent far less 
than we were disposed to claim. Yet the fact was 
known to the world; it had been, to some extent, 
acknowledged by Mexico herself, and it was never, 
to my knowledge, disputed, until this gentleman 
arose in the American Congress to prove that 
Mexico had done us little harm and deserved no 
chastisenient at our hands. But this is not the 
last link in that unbroken chain of denunciation of 
our own Government, which has extended from 
the beginning of this difficulty down to the present 
hour, and which I fear will not cease till the Ides 
of November shall have passed. No occasion has 
ever been lost to those honorable gentlemen, for 
the presentation and dissemination of arguments 
of this kind in derogation of the justice of our 
cause. But the last and most extraordinary stage 
of this proceeding — the very acme and crowning 
point of all its madness — has been reached only 
during the present session of Congress. 

What was the state of things at the opening of 
this session? Our gallant army, by the bravest 
deeds on the records of the world, had cut its way 
to the city of Mexico itself. The enemy was in- 



deed prostrate, but was still hostile and breathing 
vengeance. Under these circumstances, the Presi- 
dent called upon us to appropriate money and au- 
thorize the raising of men, in order to carry the war 
still further and to compel Mexico to accept terms 
of honorable peace. But what has been the course 
of the Opposition ? Have they adopted the sug- 
gestions of the President? No! The same argu- 
ments and the same denunciations of our own 
country and its Government have been continued, 
for the purpose, no doubt, of operating on the 
Presidential election. Instead of voting the men 
and money demanded, they paused to inquire into 
the origin of the war, and to denounce it as utterly 
unjust in its commencement, and, in its prosecu- 
tion , looking to conquest alone. These gentlemen 
proposed nothing — they did nothing. They made 
no movement to grant men and money for the 
further prosecution of the war; nor, on the other 
hand, did they propose to withdraw the army, or 
to occupy a defensive line. In short, they seemed 
disposed to do nothing to end the war, either by 
striking the enemy or abandoning the contest. 
Their policy has been to talk, and not to act. All 
their efforts seem to be directed to one point only — 
to throw the responsibility of the war on their own 
country, and to brand its origin with disgrace. 
And in pursuing this apparent design, what a spec- 
tacle has been here presented to the world ! An 
American House of Representatives, after being 
engaged for nearly two years in a war prosecuted 
under all constitutional and legal forms of authori- 
ty, and prosecuted, too, by the aid of many of 
these gentlemen voting for war measures after 
many glorious battles had been fought, and after 
innumerable towns and cities, and one-third of the 
enemy's territory had been taken, — this House of 
Representatives, the guardian of the people's wel- 
fare and of the sacred honor of the country, sol- 
emnly declares, by the vote of a majority, that 
"the war was unnecessarily and unconstitutionally 
commenced by the President!" 

Mr. Speaker, the facts to which I have adverted 
cannot be denied. We may differ as to the con- 
sequences of these acts and the inferences to be 
justly drawn from them, but I apprehend that no 
one can refuse to acknowledge that such has been 
the course of the Opposition, from the commence- 
ment of this struggle. I will not use the words 
which have been so often quoted and commented 
on in this House, and say, that by this course, 
gentlemen have given " aid and comfort to the 
enemy." Should I do so, I should expect to be 
overwhelmed in that flood of denunciation which 
[ has been poured upon the author of this phrase. 
I wish to say nothmg offensive to the feelings of 
t gentlemen on this floor. But, sir, no one can com- 
plain of me for stating that the speeches and argu- 
ments of gentlemen here have been echoed through- 
out Mexico, They have been greedily caught up 
by the Mexican newspapers; they have been free- 
ly scattered amona: the armies of the enemy; they 
have reached the Mexican people everysvhere, and 
have simk deep into their hearts. And now, with- 
out the use of any opprobrious terms, I ask of 
I honorable gentlemen, in all candor and honesty, if 
I these things could, by any possibility, ffiil to have 
! a serious influence upon the Mexican Government 
, and people.^ — if they could fail to give ihem hope 
land courage, obstinacy and perseverance? 1 ask 
if they could fail to deepen their hatred against 



us, and to fix their determination in opposition to 
an advantageous peace? 

Diirino: the last session of Cono:ress, General 
Scott had left the United States for Mexico, and it 
was known to all that his object was the conquest 
of Vera Cruz. Gentlemen in the Opposition here 
voted men and money to aid in that enterprise. 
Now, suppose, while our gallant army and navy 
lay before Vera Cruz, bombarding that city ; 
while the very heavens were blazing with our shells 
and rockets, and our balls were fi\lling like a de- 
structive hail-storm upon that devoted city; sup- 
pose, by some invisible agency, you could have 
entered a dwelling — its walls, perhaps, perforated 
by ball after ball, and the family thrown into the 
utmost confusion and terror — and laid upon the 
table these declarations of the American Congress; 
suppose you could have read to them the words 
of a distinguished Senator, "meet them with 
bloody hands and hospitable graves;" suppose at 
that moment you could have informed them that a 
majority of this House had solemnly voted that the 
war was " unnecessarily and unconstitutionally 
commenced by the President;" what would have 
been the effect of this information ? The very chil- 
dren would have forgotten their fears, and would 
have exclaimed, in the inspiration of the moment, 
"Courage, my countrymen ! Let these walls crum- 
ble ! — let this fair city fall ! — let it be consumed ! — 
let it be razed to its very foundations! — let us per- 
ish I — but let us never surrender to the northern 
tyrant, who tramples upon the Constitution of his 
own country, in order to destroy the liberties of 
ours!" The fearful shell by their side, with its 
fuse burnt to the socket, would have been forgot- 
ten, and its destructive effect there would have 
served only to spread wider and deeper the fell 
purpose of revenge. It is true, you did not furnish 
the enemy with ammunition to be used on the field 
of battle; but you did furnish them with argu- 
ments to be used in the councils of negotiation. 
You did indeed vote to supply our army with the 
sword and the gun; but, at the same time, you have 
done everything in your power to blunt the edge 
of our sword, and to take from our victories the 
moral force they were ciiculated to exert, leaving 
only their carnage and devastation, to rankle and 
fester in the liearts of the enemy. 

The gentleman from Mississippi, in his speech 
this morning, has reiterated the charge of a bargain 
between the President and Santa Anna. I have 
never for a moment believed in the truth of the 
charge, because the President tells us it is not true. 
But, sir, since gentlemen will have it so, let us 
admit that such a bargain was made while Santa 
Anna was in the West Indies. In pursuance of 
this alleged understanding, Santa Anna is permit- 
ted to return to Mexico, and is soon invested with 
supreme power. Mr. Polk calls upon Santa Anna 
to fulfill his engagement and make the advantageous 
treaty he had promised. How do you suppose the 
Mexican General would have replied ? " What !" 
he would have exclaimed, " Do you have the au- 
dacity to urge thefulfillment of the bargain i made 
in Havana.^ Why, sir, I was grossly deceived. 
When I made that bargain, 1 thought your war 
was just. Your Congress voted almost unanimous- 
ly that Mexico had begun it, and I saw little at 
that time to contradict.4,his assertion. But now, 
sir, your legislators — men in high places — tell me 
that you, yourself, are the author of this war. 



Your Senators tell me to meet you ' with bloody 
hands and hospitable graves;' and even the House 
of Representatives, when it meets again, will vote 
that you have 'unnecessarily and unconstitution- 
ally' made this war. And do you expect me to 
keep faith with such a traitor ? Never! away! I 
j have drawn the sword and thrown away the scab- 
1 bard, and you shall never have peace while a drop 
I of blood flows in my veins!" Unfortunately, Mr. 
Speaker, there would be but two much force in 
[ this supposed reply of the Mexican President — 
a force drawn legitimately from the admissions, 
I assertions, and arguments of American statesmen 
{ in this House and the Senate. 
I It is after all this, that gentlemen denounce the 
President for not giving them still furtlier means 
j to carry on their notable game of opposition — for 
j not opening to their eyes the archives of the State 
Department and exposing to the view of the world 
the correspondence of our Government with its 
minister, when in the capital of the enemy! Sir, 
these gentlemen are not content with charging cor- 
{ ruption and tyranny upon their government, but 
I they are desirous of ruthlessly cutting into the 
I very vitals of the country in order to see whether 
they cannot discover the corruption and disease, 
regardless of the danger of the wound. 

Mr. Speaker, I have now but little mere to say. 
I have only to notice that mode of argument which, 
from the plainest indications here, is to be the 
I sequel, and the fit sequel too, to all that I have now 
attempted to describe. Some of these honorable 
I gentlemen will assert here, and before the people, 
i that the President, in the late treaty, has not ac- 
'' complished his boasted object — has not obtained 
1 either indemnity for the past or security for the 
I future; in short, that the treaty is by no means ad- 
I vantao^eous to the country, except as the means of 
escaping from a very odious war. But, sir, there 
! will be a thousand voices raised to maintain the 
] truth — a thousand tongues and pens employed to 
j expose and denounce the false. The facts which 
I have this day stated shall be heard throughout 
{ the country, to the utmost borders of the land. 
j Thf se will show the people where rests the respon- 
sibility for any failure in this adjustment to secure 
the honor and just interests of our Government. 
For everything wrong in this treaty, gentlemen of 
the Opposition will be held largely responsible; 
f )r anything right or good in it, they will be enti- 
tled to no credit whatever; because their speeches 
and conduct have tended as far as possible to pre- 
vent it. What could the President do? Impelled 
by one force and restrained by another, what could 
he do but follow the law of the composition and 
resolution of forces, and go between the two ? He 
had asked for the prompt supply of men and mo- 
ney to enable him the more effectually to subdue 
the enemy and force him into the terms demanded. 
Three months had passed, and nothing import- 
ant had been done — nothing but the fulinination 
of incessant denunciation against the Executive. 
Humbled and broken as Alexico has been, does 
any man believe that the transcictions in this Hall 
have had no influence upon the terms of this 
treaty? Do gentlemen suppose they will not op- 
erate upon the Mexican Congress in their action, 
when it shall be presented to tliem for ratification? 
We cannot doubt it — they have, to some extent, 
controlled the conditions of peace. Had the sug-- 
gestions of the President at the commencement of 



8 



tlie session been complied with — ^liad the infor- 
rnation gone forth throughout Mexico, that the 
American Congress had promptly voted men and 
money, and that we were hastening on reinforce- 
ments to push the war yet further, who can doubt 
that we might have dictated our own terms ? But 
far different from this have been the reports ema- 
nating from this Capitol, and far different has been 
their influence upon the terms of this treaty. 

I was in favor of the ratification of the treaty, 
Mr. Speaker; not because it was such as might 
have been procured if Congress had done what I 
believed to be its duty, but because, against the 
determined opposition of a powerful party at home, 
I believed it to be the best there was any prospect 
of obtaining. The responsibility for any failure, 
the credit due for anything accomplished — these 
must be determined by the award of the sovereign 
people. To them I am perfectly willing to submit 
the whole question. 

At the same time, sir, T am not insensible to the 
importance of the vast acquisitions we shall have 
made if this treaty shall be finally consummated. 
For a comparatively paltry consideration we ob- 



tain a magnificent territory^ — an empire in itself— 
as great in extent as the original thirteen States of 
this Union, when they first arose and broke the 
bonds of the mightiest Power on this globe. We 
obtain more than six hundred thousand square 
miles — more than four hundred millions of acres — 
the sovereignty over which would of itself be to 
us invaluable, even if there should not be one acre 
of public land. We get the means of an easy and 
practicable communication to the Pacific, with some 
of the most magnificent harbors in the world. 
This is not the occasion, sir, to speak of the ad- 
vantages of the war which has been forced upon 
us by the enemy, or of the terms of peace which 
we have been compelled to accept by the Opposi- 
tion at home. I am satisfied with every part of 
this great chapter in the history of our country, 
except that part of it which I have now attempted 
to depict. Under all the circumstances, with all 
disadvantages to encounter, I am firmly convinced 
that posterity will look back upon it as reflecting 
glory upon the present Administration, and as 
constituting one of the brightest periods in the life 
of our beloved country. 
















ii^-g, • .o^:c-^-r-^o. ' • ' > .»^- -.\ 












>-c 



4'^ 






%''Wv' vW\^^* %''W*/ V - 



^^. .-^^ ''' 










